Search for: "Ayala v. United States"
Results 61 - 78
of 78
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jan 2011, 1:49 am
United States, 10-5296, and Vazquez v. [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 12:37 pm
United States v. [read post]
26 Dec 2010, 9:01 pm
United States v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 3:55 pm
United States v. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 8:26 pm
CAAF today released this opinion in United States v. [read post]
15 May 2010, 3:23 am
True, an objectively reasonable traffic stop is not invalidated because the primary motivation of the police was to investigate some other matter (see Whren v United States, 517 US 806 [1996]; People v. [read post]
8 Apr 2010, 9:10 pm
Today, it has a large presence in the eastern United States, including parts of Maryland and Virginia. [read post]
6 Apr 2010, 2:27 pm
Audio of today’s CAAF oral argument in United States v. [read post]
4 Apr 2010, 6:05 pm
Tuesday’s second case is United States v. [read post]
20 Dec 2009, 11:18 am
Why did the Dominican interest and also of the United States disappear? [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 4:55 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Aug 2009, 7:00 am
Ayala filed a demurrer to the petition arguing that it failed to state a cause of action. [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 2:55 pm
United States 128 S. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 1:09 pm
Ayala-Tapia, No. 06-2781 A conviction and sentence for importing and possessing with intent to distribute heroin are affirmed where: 1) the government presented sufficient evidence for a rational jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant "knew" she was carrying drugs; and 2) defendant failed to meet the statutory requirements for the "safety valve" exception to apply to her case. [read post]
11 Feb 2008, 8:08 am
U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, February 04, 2008 State of Wisconsin v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:35 am
Bureau of Prisons, No. 06-9130 I"n a case involving the scope of 28 U.S.C. section 2680, which carves out certain exceptions to the United States' waiver of sovereign immunity for torts committed by federal employees, the Court rules that section 2680's broad phrase "any other law enforcement officer" covers all law enforcement officers, and not just law enforcement officers enforcing customs or excise laws. [read post]
29 Jul 2007, 8:30 am
Ayala v. [read post]
16 May 2007, 9:56 am
Beezhold's written plan in the chart specifically stated that Mrs. [read post]
